1 ... S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4.
2 ... T EX . P EN AL C ODE A NN . 2 2 .0 1 1 (a )(2 ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ).



## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO . 2- 07- 274- CR
VI CT OR VE GA AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 367TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F DENTO N CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A p p e l l a n t V i c to r V e g a ap p e a ls h i s c o n v i c ti o n s fo r se x u a l as sa u l t of a chi l d. We a f f i r m.

23 ... Id. § 2 2 .0 1 1 (a )(2 )(A ),(B ).
4 ... S eeT EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . A NN . a rt. 4 2 .0 8 (a ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 6 ).
5 ... Ri ppee v. State, 3 8 4 S .W .2 d 7 1 7 , 7 1 8 ( T e x . C r i m . A p p . 1 9 6 4 ); Rangel v. State, 1 9 9 S .W .3 d 5 2 3 , 5 3 7 (T e x . A p p .— F o r t W o r t h 2 0 0 6 ), p e t. di sm ’d, i mprovi den tly gr

anted, 2 5 0 S .W .3 d 9 6 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 8 ). 6 ... T EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . a rt. 1 3 .1 7 (V e rn o n 2 0 0 5 ). 2 A ppe l l antm ett he com pl ai nan ton t he i nt er net w hen sh e w asf ourt ee n or f i f t ee n a nd hew as i n hi s t hi rt i es . O vert he cou r seoft he nex ts i x m ont hs t o a y e a r, h e h a d se xw i th h e r m u l ti p l e ti m e s i n h i s D e n to n C o u n ty a p a rt m e n t. A f t era t w o- dayj ur y t r i al , ap pel l ant w as f ound gui l t y on t hr ee co unt s of
se xua l as sa ul tofa chi l d. U pon hea r i ng add i t i ona l ev i den ce an d a r gum ent , t he 3 j ury a ss es se d pun i sh m entatf i f t ee n ye ar s’ co nf i nem enton c ountone an d t w ent y year s’ each on cou nt s t w o and t hr ee. T h e t r i al courtsent enced appel l anti n accor dance w i t h t he j ur y’ s ver dic tand or der ed t he sent ences st ac ke d. 4 I n poi nt one , app el l ant cha l l eng est he su f f i ci enc y oft he evi den ce t o pr ove venue i n D ent on C oun t y. Evi dence i s suf f i ci entt o pr ove venu e i f t he j ur y m ay r ea so nab l y c onc l ude t hatt he of f ens e w asco m m i t t ed i n t he cou nt y a l l ege d. 5 V enue need be pr oven o nl y by a pr epon der ance oft he evi dence. 6 Th e com pl ai nant t est i f i ed t hatappel l anthad vagi nal and or al i nt er cour se
w i t h he rei ghtt o t en t i m es i n h i s apa rt m ent . The m ana geroft he apa rt m ent3

com pl ex w her e appel l ant l i ved dur i ng t he t i m e t est i f i ed t hatt he apart m entw as lo c a t e d in D e n t o n C o u n t y . T h is e v id e n c e is s u f f ic ie n tf o rt h e ju r yt o re a s o n a b ly
con cl ude t hatt he of f ens es occ ur r ed i n Dent on Count y. Poi ntone i s ove r r ul ed. U nderhi s second poi nt , appel l antcont ends i n t w o subpo i nt s t hatt he t r i al
c o u rtab u se d i ts d i sc reti o n i n ad m i tti n g i n ev i d e n c e the co m p l a i n a n t’ s e -m a i l to th e D a l l a s p o l i c e an d h e r sw o rn w ri tten sta tem e n t. T h e c o m p l a i n a n t’s e -m a i l , S ta te ’s E x h i b i t 4 , w a s a d m i tte d fo r th e re c o rd onl y. The f ol l ow i ng po rt i ons w er e r ea d t o t he j ur y: I’ m n o te n t ir e lys u r e t o w h o m I s h o u ld b e s e n d in g t h is . M yn a m e is [ D . R . ], a n d I l i ve i n D ent on, Texas. I ’ m 20 year s ol d and a new m ot her , s om et hi ng w hi ch has r ea l l y gi ven m e r ea so n t o r eop en t he past I have been t r yi ng t o f or get . W hen I w as 14 year s ol d, I m et V i ct orV ega onl i ne, w ho sai d he w as 30 , and w e deci ded t o m eet up t o ha ve se x. He sh ow ed m e s om e, an d he as ke d m e t o pos e f or hi m t o t ak e p i ct ur esal one an d w i t h hi m , w hi ch I di d.

. . . . I d o n ’ t k n o w h i s a d d r e s s , b u t I d o k n o w t h a t h e i s t h e o wn e rof W ol f Paw H os t i ng, ht t p: \\ w w w . w p. com . I fI s entt hi s t o t he w r ong peo pl e, I ap ol ogi z e. I fI ca n pr ovi de anym or e h el p, l etm e k now . But , pl ea se , i fan yt hi ng a tal l ca n be done t hi s m any yea r s aft ert he f ac t . I ca n’ ts t and t he t hough t of m y da ught ergoi ng t hr ough t he sa m e t hi ngs I di d be ca us e o ft hat . I onl y w i sh I ha d s ai d s om et hi ng e a r lie rin s t e a d o fc a r in g s o m u c h a b o u t w h e t h e r m y p a r e n t s w o u ld f i nd ou t . Than k you, [ D . R . ] . M y addr ess. A ppe l l antco nt end s i n s ubpoi nt 2A t hat t hes e exc er pt s sh oul d notha ve bee n a dm i t t ed bec aus e t hey con t ai ned hea r sa y; t heydi d nots at i sf y t he r ul e o f
o p ti o n a l c o m p l e te n e s s ; a n d th e yh a rm fu l l yb o l s te re d th e c o m p l a i n a n t’s7 ... L e da y v. State, 9 8 3 S .W .2 d 7 1 3 , 7 1 8 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 8 );

Crocker v. State, 5 7 3 S .W .2 d 1 9 0 , 2 0 1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 7 8 [P a n e l O p .]). 4 t est i m ony. O ur r evi ew of t he r ecor d, how ever , r eveal s t hatt he f act s cont ai ned i n t he exc er pt s w er e a dm i tt ed el se w her e d ur i ng t r i al w i t houtobj ec t i on. The
c o m p la in a n tt e s t if ie d , w it h o u to b je c t io n , t o h e r n a m e a n d a g e ; t h a ts h e liv e d in D e n to n ; th a t he r ne w m o th e rho o d l e d h e r t o tal kto th e p o l i c e ab o u t ap p e l l a n t; t h a ts h e w a s b o r n in 1 9 8 5 a n d m e t a p p e lla n t o n lin e in 2 0 0 0 ; t h a t h e w a s in h is t hi rt i es ; t hatt heyex cha nge d nud e phot ogr aph s; t hatt heym ett o ha ve se x; an d th a t h e o w n e d a w e b -h o s ti n g s i te n a m e d W o l fP a w . A t r ia l c o u rt ’s d e c is io n “ o v e r r u lin g a n o b je c t io n t o e v id e n c e w ill n o tre s u lt i n r ever sal w hen othersuch evi dence w as r ecei ved w i t hou tobj ect i on ei t her b e fo re o r a fte r th e c o m p l a i n e d -o f ru l i n g .” Because t he sam e f act s cont ai ned 7 i n c om pl ai nan t ’ s e- m ai l w er e a dm i t t ed i n e vi den ce dur i ng t r i al w i t houtobj ec t i on, app el l ant ’ s com pl ai nti s w ai ved . Subpoi nt2A i s ove r r ul ed. I n s ub po i nt 2B, a pp e l l a nt c on t e nd s t ha t t he t r i a l c ou rt a bu se d i ts di sc r et i on i n a dm i t t i ng t he ent i r e w r i t t en st at em entt he com pl ai nan tga ve t o t he D al l asPol i ce D epa rt m ent , St at e’ s Exhi bi t5, be ca us e i tex ce ede d t he sc ope of
c r o s s -e x a m in a t io n , w a s u n f a ir ly p r eju d ic ia l, a n d c o n s t it u t e d b o ls t e r in g . A tt r ia l, how ever , appel l antm er el y obj e c te d to t hi s st at em enton hear say gr oun ds.8 ... S ee Hei del berg v. State, 144 S . W . 3d 535, 537 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2 0 0 4 ).

9 ... S ee T EX . R. A PP . P . 3 8 .1 (h ); InreJ.B.W., 99 S. W . 3d 218, 225 ( Tex. A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 3 , n o p e t.).

10 ... Hei del ber g, 1 4 4 S .W .3 d a t 5 3 7 .

5 Ther ef or e, t he c o m pl ai nti s w ai ved be ca us e i tdoe s notco m portw i t h t he
o b je c t io n a tt r ia l. Subpoi nt2B i s ove r r ul ed. 8 I n poi nt t hr ee , app el l ant ar gue s t hatt he t r i al co urtab us ed i t s di sc r et i on i n a dm i t t i ng du r i ng t he puni sh m entpha set w o c om put erdi s k s se i z ed f r om a p p e l l a n t’s a p a rtm e n t b e c a u s e th e yw e re n o t p ro p e rl ya u th e n ti c a te d a n d w e re unf ai r l y pr ej udi ci al unde rTexa s Rul e o fEvi den ce 403. A p p e l l antci t esno aut hor i t y f orhi s com pl ai ntt hat t he exh i bi t s w er e i m pr ope r l y aut hen t i ca t ed. The
com pl ai nt i s, t her ef or e, w ai ved bec aus e i t i s i nad equ at el y br i ef ed. A p p e l l a n t’s 9
com pl ai ntt hatt he exhi bi t s w er e unf airly p re ju di ci al underr ul e 40 3 i s al so
w a iv e d b e c a u s e a p p e lla n td id n o tra is e t h is o b je c t io n t o t h e e x h ib it s a tt r ia l. 10 Poi ntt hr ee i s ove r r ul ed. I n poi nt f our , app el l ant con t end s t hatt he t r i al co urtab us ed i t s di sc r et i on i n deny i ng a m i st r i al dur i ng t he pun i shm entphas e a f t eran of f i cergave a nonr es pons i ve ans w ert o a que st i on f r om ap pel l ant ’ s cou ns e l . Dur i ng app el l ant ’ s cr os s- exa m i nat i on ofD et ec t i ve Le Fl or e, t he f ol l ow i ng e xch ang e occ ur r ed:11 ... Hawki ns v. State, 1 3 5 S .W .3 d 7 2 , 7 7 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 4 ). 12 ... Ri dyol ph v. State, 5 4 5 S .W .2 d 7 8 4 , 7 8 7 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 7 7 ). 13 ... Col bur n v. State, 9 6 6 S .W .2 d 5 1 1 , 5 2 0 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 8 ).
14 ... O ’ D el l v. State, 651 S. W . 2d 48, 52 ( Te x. App . — Fo rtW ort h 1983, p e t. re f’d ). 6 Q . I se e D et ec t i ve C ox’ s nam e i n s om e o fyou rr epo rt s. Di d yo u w or k w i t h D et ect i ve C ox on t hi s? A . I di d. Q . Is it fa i r to s a yy o u d i d t h e b u l ko f th e i n v e s ti g a ti v e w o rk her e? A . A s f aras t hi s c a s e goes, cor r ect . D et ect i ve C ox w as w or ki ng on t he chi l d por nog r aphy case agai nstM r . V ega. C oun sel f orappel l antobj ect ed on t he gr oun d t hatt he det ect i ve’ s answ erw as n o n res p o n si v e . T h e tr i a l co u rtsu sta i n e d the o b j e c ti o n , i n stru c ted the j u ry to d is r e g a r d t h e d e t e c t iv e ’s re m a r k , a n d d e n ie d a p p e lla n t ’s m o t io n f o rm is t r ia l. M i st r i al is an ext r em e r em edy t he deni al ofw hi ch i s r evi ew ed f oran abu seofdi sc r et i on. G ener al l y, an i nst r uct i on t o di sr egar d cur es any pr ej udi ce 11
re s u l ti n g fro m a n o n re s p o n s i v e a n s w e r. A j ur y i s pr esum ed t o f ol l ow t he t r i al 12
cour t ’ s i nst r uct i ons. W e h avehe l d thatan i ns t r uct i on c ur ed pr ej udi ce f r om 13 a pol i ce- of f i cerw i t ness’ s non r esponsi ve answ er dur i ng t he pun i shm entphase
w her e t her e w asno e vi den ce ofba d f ai t h. 147

T h e t r ia l c o u rt d id n o ta b u s e it s d is c r e t io n in re f u s in g t o d e c la r e a m is t r ia l. A ppe l l antdoe s notal l ege , an d w e f i nd no ev i den ce s how i ng, t hatt he det ec t i ve ac t ed i n ba d f ai t h, and w e f i nd not hi ng i n t he r ec or d t o r ebu tt he pr es um pt i on th a t th e j u ryfo l l o w e d th e tri a l c o u rt’s p ro m p t i n s tru c ti o n to d i s re g a rd . Furt her m or e, t her e i s am ple evi dence i n t he r ecor d est abl i shi ng t hat
a p p e l l a n te n g a g e d i n c h i l d p o r n o g r a p h y . Ap p e l l a n th a d c r e a t e d h i s o wn DV D show i ng hi m engage d in s e x ual act s w i t h t he com pl ai nant w hen she w as fi fte e n . C o m p u te r d i s c s c o n ta i n i n g c h i l d p o rn o g ra p h y w e re fo u n d i n a p p e l l a n t’s apa rt m en t and r epr es ent at i ve ofhund r edsofs i m i l ardi sc s. I n vi ew oft he
e v i d e n c e th a t a p p e l l a n t h a d e n g a g e d i n c h i l d p o rn o g ra p h y , th e o ffice r’s m e re m en tio n t hatt he pol i ce had i nvest i gat ed a chi l d por nog r aphy case agai nst app el l antw asnotunf ai r l y pr ej udi ci al . Poi ntf ouri s ove r r ul ed. H avi ng ov er r ul ed al l of app el l ant ’ s poi nt s, w e a f f i r m t he j udgm entoft he tr i a l co u rt . P E R CU R I AM PA N EL: CA YC E, C. J. ; D A U PH I N O T and M C C O Y, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Aug us t14, 2008